Here is an interesting article I came across while thinking of something to say about my friend George Bush. I originally wanted to do a thread about Bush being brainwashed. My thinking was that no one can act like this man does without some kind of psychological disorder to propel him to act the way he does. I googled " brainwashed " and " George Bush brainwashed " to see what I could come up with.

You will encounter many articles as you are googling that deal with the brainwashing of the American public as it relates to the current political situation and the type of government that they currently " enjoy ". This should be instructive enough to let you know what kind of a situation we are dealing with here in America.

How do you find a lion that has swallowed you?” asked Swiss psychologist, Carl Jung, commenting on the moral dilemma posed by the “shadow,” his insightful term for the dark, hidden side of the human psyche. The answer to Jung’s questions is “you can’t find or see that lion”—not as long as you are inside the beast. And therein resides the essential dilemma of a group’s dark side or shadow: it is nearly impossible for those caught inside a group’s belief system to see their own dark side with any clarity or objectivity. This hidden side grows over time, regressing, becoming more and more aggressive. It’s the “long bag we drag behind us,” says poet Robert Bly—where, as individuals, we dispose of all those things that are too uncomfortable to look at. “The long-repressed shadow of Dr. Jekyll rises up in the shape of Mr. Hyde, deformed, an ape-like figure glimpsed against the alley wall.”[1] Now imagine millions of Mr. Hydes and you have a sense of the group shadow of fundamentalist, right wing extremists dressed up as “compassionate conservatives,” led by George W. Bush. It’s like shifting from a hand gun to a nuclear bomb. And it began long ago in both the Moslem and Christian worlds.

**********************************************************

To characterize this article for you: it is about George Bush and Christian Fundamentalism and about the idea of being trapped in this "shadow." You become consumed in the religion and its cultist ways.( In this case George Bush and Evangelical Christianity ) It controls you and your behaviour, and it explains for us the political actions of this president. The article explains for us how Christian Fundamentalism can be just as dangerous as that of an Islamic Fundamentalist (As evidenced by the Iraq War ) They are both " consumed." Neither is better.

The article really emphasizes the danger of this obsession with Christian Fundamentalism and ties to the goals or aims of the state. It is a very dangerous situation and it is behind the policy and philosophy of the current regime.

The article is long, but worth reading. There are many helpful insights and comparisons to other totalitarian regimes.

_________________My life is full of optimism and I am not going to stop living until I know the answers to all of the important things, like why does love exist.

1st of all let's get one thing clear. bush only CLAIMS to be a fundamentalist christian.

his actions and the way he lives and speaks says things quite the opposite.

there was an interview he did in nbcs meet the press with tim russert in which russert asked him point blank if he belonged to the occult organization skull 'n bones. bush being caught off guard totally fumbled and stuttered around and eventually stammered through an answer that was basically evasive.

now as anyone who professes to be a fundamentalist christian knows if you are asked about such organizations those who are true to thier faith realize that gods word clearly says you CANNOT serve 2 masters. and part of your personal testimony would also include being totally against organizations that have ties to the occult like skull 'n bones.

bush had that chance to disavow himself as a fundamentalist christian from being under the direct guidance od satan and his minnions.

he utterly refused to do so.

just one of the many proofs in a long list of evidence that proves he's nothing but the charlatan type occult loving liar he truely is.

a few discerning believers like myself realize this.

most of the rest are either too lazy or just plain ignorant to figure it out.

i believe bush is a "fundie"....never had any doubt. but, even fundies are not without fault.

but, when we have a president who actually believes he and god communicate back and forth, and seeks this divinity for answers to america's problems.....we have a bigger problem.

if someone kills another human and claims that god told him to do it, our first thoughts are he's a whacko and definately needs psychiatric help. but, for some reason, when bush does it, it's as if it's really true and people believe it to be so. personally, i've always thought bush to be borderline insane ever since he claims he discussed invading iraq with god....that's all i needed to hear. but, for many americans, bush and god actually did discuss invading iraq.

Those who believe Bush got a supernatural deity's attention and that the same deity told him to invade Iraq.

Sheez...even if I believed in the Christian god, and that same god had "chosen" the insane and psychopathic Bush for this so-called special attention, I'd cancel my subscription to that belief quickly.

_________________

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help. That other party, they work for people who don't need help. That's all there is to it."~Harry S. Truman

Seems as though Rooster and MGA are at odds as to the true nature of Bush's religious convictions. I certainly don't profess to know whether or not he is a true believer in the Christ. All I know is that he doesn't act like a Christian, that is to say, my understanding of what a Christian should act and talk like. He just seems so unconcerned about the death of potentially, 100,000 Iraqi citizens. That is people who would still be alive, a people thinking and dreaming about their future. George Bush decided it was in their best interests to remove their leader. And, he is unapologetic about the current state of affairs as well.

Do you recall the Iraqi woman on television just before the invasion, and after the First Gulf War, pleading to American viewers. Her hands were up in the air and she was pleading with the American public. And, she poses the question to the audience:

" Do you do all of this just for oil? "

I would side more closely with Rooster here in his claim that Bush is not a Christian. I think he acts like ( excuse me, says he is one ) one for the benefit of gaining voters and supporters for his war aims, but that is about the extent of it. If Bush is a real Fundie, then I need more proof. I need to see his church, his spiritual leader, and his fellow congregationalists in order that I may interview them. I want to ask them questions about the veracity of their fellow follower of Christ. Specifically, I would ask them. Do you think he is for real?

_________________My life is full of optimism and I am not going to stop living until I know the answers to all of the important things, like why does love exist.

Unfortunately I've noticed over time, even in some of the best and most moral people I know, the tendency to look at examples of their faith gone terribly wrong and deny that the individual is a member of their faith.

Universally the argument for this is one that shows their own morality but in what I will readily admit is my opinion shows a great deal of naivety. Their argument is that because the individual in question has taken a different interpretation of what constitutes proper doctrine and religious behavior which they find to be morally wrong the individual can not be a True X.

By this standard one can simply disassociate the wrongs perpetrated by those who follow their faith by proclaiming they didn't follow that particular faith despite all evidence to the contrary. I've seen people claim that Christianity is not responsible for the Inquisition or the Witch Burning Hysteria because as they proclaim "no true Christian could do such a thing, it's reprehensible. Thus they coulnd't have been a Christian." Despite the clear and unmistakable identity of the individuals as members of that particular faith.

It all comes down to the matter of act rather than faith. If they perform the act of worshipping a particular deity then they are a follower of that deity. While others can find their ideology, doctrine, and interpretations of faith twisted and reprehensible those beliefs can not change the acts of the other party. Who if they perform the acts of a religion are part of that religion regardless of doctrinal interpretations within the faith.

A problem can not be ignored into nonexistence, reality is that which exists whether you believe in it or not. Thus these problems can only be solved by acknowledging that something has in fact gone wrong and seeking a solution to it. Because of the nature of monotheist religions and especially their focus on faith as an instrument this is something that can be painful for those within the religion to confront and so many are unwilling to do so.

In a philosophy class I am currently taking we are discussing philosophy of religion and that has prompted me to closely examine the nature of practices and beliefs in the various factions of the overall Judeo-Christian/Muslim religious group. I'm considering posting them here if there's any real interest in them. I cannot claim true objectivity as I tend to find monotheism distasteful, but I am an outside observer and am trying to be as objective as I can manage.

_________________I am disillusioned enough to believe nothing will get any better yet compelled to make the attempt regardless

Unfortunately I've noticed over time, even in some of the best and most moral people I know, the tendency to look at examples of their faith gone terribly wrong and deny that the individual is a member of their faith.

Universally the argument for this is one that shows their own morality but in what I will readily admit is my opinion shows a great deal of naivety. Their argument is that because the individual in question has taken a different interpretation of what constitutes proper doctrine and religious behavior which they find to be morally wrong the individual can not be a True X.

By this standard one can simply disassociate the wrongs perpetrated by those who follow their faith by proclaiming they didn't follow that particular faith despite all evidence to the contrary. I've seen people claim that Christianity is not responsible for the Inquisition or the Witch Burning Hysteria because as they proclaim "no true Christian could do such a thing, it's reprehensible. Thus they coulnd't have been a Christian." Despite the clear and unmistakable identity of the individuals as members of that particular faith.

It all comes down to the matter of act rather than faith. If they perform the act of worshipping a particular deity then they are a follower of that deity. While others can find their ideology, doctrine, and interpretations of faith twisted and reprehensible those beliefs can not change the acts of the other party. Who if they perform the acts of a religion are part of that religion regardless of doctrinal interpretations within the faith.

A problem can not be ignored into nonexistence, reality is that which exists whether you believe in it or not. Thus these problems can only be solved by acknowledging that something has in fact gone wrong and seeking a solution to it. Because of the nature of monotheist religions and especially their focus on faith as an instrument this is something that can be painful for those within the religion to confront and so many are unwilling to do so.

In a philosophy class I am currently taking we are discussing philosophy of religion and that has prompted me to closely examine the nature of practices and beliefs in the various factions of the overall Judeo-Christian/Muslim religious group. I'm considering posting them here if there's any real interest in them. I cannot claim true objectivity as I tend to find monotheism distasteful, but I am an outside observer and am trying to be as objective as I can manage.

Eternalwanderer,

If I am reading your post correctly, you are saying that Bush is a Christian. I hope I am not doing any disprespect to your post here. But, if this is in fact the case then you are agreeing with the article that I have posted here. Maybe George Bush is experiencing his shadow, his dark side if you will. He may be the Christian that he claims to be he is just not acting like the Christian that we expect him to be.There are many excellent paragraphs in this article that I could duplicate for you, but you have your own copy of course so you can do your own reading if you want to. I just read the article over again. Here is one paragraph that seemingly fits into what your thinking is, and explains in part the behavior of George Bush ( what this religon can do to you if you approach it from your dark side ) A paragraph quote below:

Shadow dynamics can shift the focus of our beliefs with stunning speed to another “evil” enemy. Petty dictators are convenient “hooks” on which groups can hang their shadow, their dirty laundry; a perfect example being Saddam Hussein who, in 1990-1991 magically transitioned from being a relatively obscure U.S. ally (receiving military aid, weapons, satellite intelligence, and high tech equipment)[**] into an incarnation of evil and a dire threat to humanity that we had to eliminate. Such is the hypnotic power of group paranoia combined with propaganda in stirring up a nationalistic, lynch mob mentality. [3]

_________________My life is full of optimism and I am not going to stop living until I know the answers to all of the important things, like why does love exist.

No you aren't reading my intentions wrong I was replying more to Rooster's sentiment however. Which would deny that Bush's Christianity based on doctrinal differences rather than act.

Quote:

1st of all let's get one thing clear. bush only CLAIMS to be a fundamentalist christian. his actions and the way he lives and speaks says things quite the opposite......now as anyone who professes to be a fundamentalist christian knows if you are asked about such organizations those who are true to thier faith realize that gods word clearly says you CANNOT serve 2 masters. and part of your personal testimony would also include being totally against organizations that have ties to the occult like skull 'n bones.

Rooster

Basically saying that a person can perform all the acts that are worship of the Christian deity yet if his doctrine differs then he isn't actually Christian if I was reading his post right. I may well be mistaken about his intent.

I was attempting to refute the argument that doctrinal disagreement is sufficient to exclude a person from a particular religious group. Mostly because by excluding such a person from the group then the problem they present in how a religion could be turned so awry can be avoided and I've always held problems must be brought in the open and acknowledged before any lasting solution can be reached.

In fact I would agree with a great deal of the article and its discussion on how the ignored dark side of individuals and groups can reach such a mass that they can effectively control their behavior. Those whose "shadow" are most dangerous are those who have ignored it the most. It is by leaving it forgotten and ignored that our dark side can manipulate and control us. The key is that we must all become acquianted with what is most excrable in ourselves. Only by understanding that part of us can we learn to keep it under our firm control than allowing it to "wag the dog" to use a phrase. Many if not most organized groups are designed to provide comforting answers so that one never has to look into their own demons and learn their nature. This is why they are so easily suborned and become puppets of their own collective inner darkness.

_________________I am disillusioned enough to believe nothing will get any better yet compelled to make the attempt regardless

In fact I would agree with a great deal of the article and its discussion on how the ignored dark side of individuals and groups can reach such a mass that they can effectively control their behavior. Those whose "shadow" are most dangerous are those who have ignored it the most. It is by leaving it forgotten and ignored that our dark side can manipulate and control us. The key is that we must all become acquianted with what is most excrable in ourselves. Only by understanding that part of us can we learn to keep it under our firm control than allowing it to "wag the dog" to use a phrase. Many if not most organized groups are designed to provide comforting answers so that one never has to look into their own demons and learn their nature. This is why they are so easily suborned and become puppets of their own collective inner darkness.

[/quote]

eternal,

I think you do the article justice with your comment here.

Here is a paragraph from the article that I like particularly:

Quote:

The invasion of American Democratic institutions by fundamentalist, historically militant (as in crusades,[*] witch hunts, inquisitions, and support of slavery) Christianity has significantly increased the stench coming from the already disturbing dark side of U.S. politics. It’s like a nightmarish replay of the Christian crusades—politics with a militant, convert-the-heathens dark side. Potent, cult-like group dynamics combine with unacknowledged and unseen shadow qualities to easily overwhelm the individual’s sense of right and wrong, often unleashing pure evil en masse.

ADVERTISEMENTAs the political world and the media divided the U.S. into red and blue states, I found myself feeling uncomfortable even thinking about driving through one of those “red” states. I would imagine that every red-state person must be a card-carrying, right wing fundamentalist. From the other side of the mountain, those “blue” states are full of liberal, soft-on-terrorism, big government socialists. Both are examples of projecting our group’s shadow onto the “enemy.” And both views prevent us from “seeing” individual human beings. We see only that group, those people. With remarkable ease, we slide into a “programmed,” either-or, group-think: we’re the good guys, they’re the bad guys. The group mind set is pulling the levers, directing individual reasoning and logic. It’s like seeing everything through red or blue-tinted glasses that color all we see and think—we’ve been swallowed. The blind lead the blinded with ludicrous comments like this: “I think all foreigners should stop interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq,”[2] Paul Wolfowitz declared, clearly not seeing his missionary, neoconservative dark side—the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq.

It is the phrases like cult like group dynamics which really catch my attention because we are after all dealing with a religion here. The Christian religion, whose members are buying into this stuff that George Bush is inflictiong upon them. He is allowing their dark side to flourish and hence achieve his objectives.

What is really going on is you have created good and evil with this shadow dynamic here. The unknowing Christian is sucked into the psychology. He is told he is fighting an enemy and loses sight of right and wrong in the process. In your battle with evil, however, and this is born out in the article, you become evil through your actions.

The general sense that I am getting from the article now is that what is taking place in America is simply " mob psychology or mob rule " This is my personal take on the situation. And, this current conditon, if I may further say is pushed and reinforced by the Administration in concert with the Main Stream Media.

NB. The bold print in the quote is mine. "Potent, cult like group dynamics"

_________________My life is full of optimism and I am not going to stop living until I know the answers to all of the important things, like why does love exist.

if someone kills another human and claims that god told him to do it, our first thoughts are he's a whacko and definately needs psychiatric help. ~ mga

You know, you have something here after thinking it over.

I have never read in either Holy Qur-an or Bible where Allah (God) told anyone to go and kill someone.

Every Prophet, messenger or man of God was always told to go and tell so and so what I (God) desire and then if that so and so did not heed the warning then God Himself did the destroying.

Now in the Holy Qur-an it plainly tells the believers to defend themselves if attacked but not once have I read where instructions are gave to be an aggressor.

Abraham, Noah, Lot, David, Job, Solomon, Isaiah, Moses, Muhammad, Jesus and the list goes on. Not one were told to hurt the hair of any but instead were told what to tell those who did not obey what would happen... and did happen... for dis-obedience.

And the reason that they were destroyed was/is because these dis-obeyers were peace breakers contrary to their idea that they were making peace.

_________________Leviticus 24:20
fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has injured the other, so he is to be injured.